Should these guns be banned?

[Teqila]

A Hot-Selling Weapon, an Inviting Target - New York Times

Should the guns in the article be banned?

I believe they shouldn't be banned because they are not used to commit crime and many people own them. Banning these guns could cause problems with people who don't want to give them up as well as endanger the livelihoods of people in the gun industry.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT ASSAULT RIFLES. IT IS ABOUT RIFLES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO ASSAULT RIFLES.

[RickTheRipper]

Two years ago in my Criminology (HS) class, we had a similar discussion, and we came to a conclusion.

Assault weapons shouldn't be banned, because they aren't really the weapons of choice for criminals. Mostly handguns and shotguns are used, not assault rifles.

Now maybe things have changed since two years ago, but I still stand by my statement that assault weapons shouldn't be banned (unless someone has data proving me wrong).

[The mOBSCENE]

There should be extensive backround checks and I believe that whoever si trying to own one should have prior experience or some sort of higher weapon clearance to get ahold of one legally like ex police and military. That sort of deal.

[Teqila]

Originally Posted by The mOBSCENE

There should be extensive backround checks and I believe that whoever si trying to own one should have prior experience or some sort of higher weapon clearance to get ahold of one legally like ex police and military. That sort of deal.

Why? They are no more deadlier than bolt action rifles, in fact they are less deadly. The .223 the AR-15 fires is commonly used for hunting small game, NATO adopted a slightly modified version of it but soldiers often complain of it's lack of stopping power that can get them killed. The .308 that many hunters use is nearly 3 times as powerful.

[Sidewinder]

Banned where? In America, yes. In other nations, no. Why?

America's population is 10 times greater than Canada, yet we have 150 times the gun murder rate.

But I don't think this is the only thing that should be banned.

Large calibur handguns, semi automatic large calibur weapons, and snub nose revolvers should be banned too. Things like Uzi's and Tec-9s should be banned as well. What should be legal? Hunting rifiles and small calibur pistols.

Why? Simply put, you don't need a Desert Eagle for self protection. Sub machine guns aren't used to kill deer. Same goes for semi auto large calibur rifiles.

[Magnum Force]

I don't understand why so many people need a firearm to protect themselves. I mean, is your neighborhood really that bad that you would need such a weapon? If so, then you are clearly living out of place. Sure, sure, it's tough to move somewhere else (money, family, etc), but if you really feel the need to have a .357 sitting under your pillow, then something is wrong with you, my friend.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for freedom and the "right to bear arms," but I don't think that our founding fathers had cannons in mind when they wrote that down. I know they weren't aware of how advanced weaponry would become, but I think they had the basic idea that small and moderately safe weapons/arms would be the ideal choice to go along with the Amendment.

The AR-15 is more of a shooting range weapon than it is a self-defense tool. My uncle is a deputy sheriff and his self-defense weapon is an old WWII M1 Garande. Even know the ammo for that is pretty large, I'd say that it's sufficient enough to protect him and his family. But some people just take it to the "overkill" level and pretty much have their own little arsenal going. And that's either ludacrisy or just pathetic.

What I'm saying is that the weapons that should be banned from the public are the ones that get the job done and then some more. Keep the ones that serve their purpose and remain within the range of total destruction. Because it'd be pretty wild if a man pulled out an MP5 and unloaded on an intruder and then tore *** to the whole house. One shot is all you really need. Hell, my uncle doesn't even load his M1, he uses it as a freaking bat.

Now, this is getting pretty long, and for some reason I feel like I contradicted myself somewhere in this post, so I'm going to stop here before I get a headache from typing such hypocrisy.

[Teqila]

You do realize the guns I'm typing about are semi-automatic? The whole "unload on an intruder" wouldn't happen even if they were full-auto.

By the way Sidewinder, nobody uses a Desert Eagle for self-defense. Criminals don't use submachine guns either. You've been believing what you see in movies too much and it's obvious you don't know much about what you want banned.

[dansdarkside]

I think Semi Automatic guns should be illegal.

If you are just using it for on the range just think what it can do in the wrong hands.

If you use it for hunting, why are you using a semi automatic weapon? Is your shot that bad?

[BoyEngland]

I think the owner of the pink one should be shot with that gun, then that specific gun be banned just for being so fruity.

Honestly, I don't think they should be banned.

It has been said before on here that criminals get these weapons some way or another so banning them won't really stop those criminals from getting the weaponary to kill whoever they feel like.

Target shooting with these rifles is something that people enjoy and those who enjoy these activities keep it as safe as they can so their "sport" is protected, why stop this to try (and fail) getting them out of the hands of criminals.

Note: My post was based on the guns being banned because of criminal use, nothing more.

[Magnum Force]

I've never condoned to the idea of banning something. It just leads to the want of it even more. Because people always want what they can't have. And I'm sure people and criminals would go to great lengths to get their hands on said banned weapons.

My thoughts: don't ban them, but rather keep strict regulations on them.